| Literature DB >> 30021535 |
Janet Hanley1, Hilary Pinnock2, Mary Paterson3, Brian McKinstry3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telemonitoring for long term conditions such as hypertension and diabetes has not been widely adopted despite evidence of efficacy in trials and policy support. The Telescot programme comprised a series of seven trials and observational studies of telemonitoring for long term conditions in primary care, all with an explanatory qualitative component which had been analysed and published separately. There were changes to the models of care within and between studies and combining datasets would provide a longitudinal view of the evolution of primary care based telemonitoring services that was not available in the individual studies, as well as allowing comparison across the different conditions monitored. We aimed to explore what drove changes to the way telemonitoring was implemented, compare experience of telemonitoring across the range of long term conditions, and identify what issues, in the experience of the participants, need to be considered in implementing new telemonitoring systems.Entities:
Keywords: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD); Diabetes; E-health; Hypertension; Primary care; Qualitative research; Telemonitoring
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30021535 PMCID: PMC6052602 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-018-0814-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Fam Pract ISSN: 1471-2296 Impact factor: 2.497
The Telescot studies
| Telemonitoring Study | Design | Number in RCT | Primary Outcome | Patients interviewed | Healthcare providers interviewed | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | COPD telemonitoring pilot [ | Observational and qualitative study (27 participants). Monitoring symptoms, O2 saturation and FEV1) | 20 | 25 | ||
| 2. | BP Telemonitoring trial (HITS) [ | RCT of BP telemonitoring with nested qualitative study | 401 | Systolic BP significantly lower in intervention group | 25 | 20 |
| 3. | BP after stroke pilot trial [ | Pilot trial of BP telemonitoring plus qualitative study | 55 | 16 (plus 23 in 3 focus groups) | 4 | |
| 4. | COPD Trial [ | RCT of COPD telemonitoring with qualitative evaluation | 256 | No difference in days to first hospital admission | 38 | 31 |
| 5. | Heart Failure [ | Qualitative study | 18 | 5 | ||
| 6. | Diabetes trial [ | RCT of blood glucose and BP telemonitoring with qualitative evaluation | 321 | HbA1c and systolic BP significantly lower in intervention group | 23 | 10 |
| 7. | COPD “light touch” [ | Observational and qualitative study (51 participants) | 20 | 14 (8 in focus group) |
Characteristics of participants in the qualitative studies
| Patients | Professionals (number) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study | Mean age of patients | Proportion of male patients | Doctors (all general practitioners (GPs) except where stated) | Nurses | Therapists | Managers and Administrators |
| COPD pilot [ | 68 | 59% | 4 | 6 | 3 | 12 |
| BP trial [ | 61 | 60% | 9 | 11 | ||
| BP after stroke pilot trial [ | 66 | 75% | 4 | |||
| COPD Trial [ | 68 | 47% | 3 GPs, 1 respiratory specialist | 9 | 6 | 12 |
| Heart Failure [ | 75 | 61% | 1 | 4 | ||
| Diabetes trial [ | 60 | 65% | 4 | 6 | ||
| COPD “light touch” [ | 67 | 50% | 3 | 5 | 6 | |
Themes and sub themes
| Theme | Associated sub themes |
|---|---|
| Using data | BP data |
| Empowering patients | • Empowering patients |
| Adjusting the model of care | • Scaling up |
| System design | • Hardware |
Mapping to the characteristics of an innovation likely to affect its adoption
| Characteristic of the innovation (from Rogers (1995) The diffusion of innovations) [ | Positive findings from this study | Negative findings from this study |
|---|---|---|
| Relative advantage (the perceived efficiencies gained by the innovation relative to current tools or procedures) | • Convenience | • Anxiety/dependence in small numbers of patients |
| Complexity/ difficulty to learn | • Most patients found telemonitoring easy | • Professional interfaces complex |
| Compatibility with the pre-existing system | • Preference for adoption within current system which influenced later implementations | • Lack of fit of professional system interfaces with workflows within practices |
| Trialability or testability | • High –particularly for patients | |
| Potential for reinvention (using the tool for initially unintended purposes) | • Patients used data to manage day to day activity | |
| Observed effects | • Higher workloads – reduced with learning and external drivers such as pressure on the system. | • Limitations and extra work created by system design |